Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A 'Marriage Strike' Emerges As Men Decide Not To Risk Loss
The Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | July 5, 2002 | Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson

Posted on 07/06/2002 5:00:19 AM PDT by buccaneer81

A 'marriage strike' emerges as men decide not to risk loss

By Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson

Katherine is attractive, successful, witty, and educated. She also can't find a husband. Why? Because most of the men this thirtysomething software analyst dates do not want to get married. These men have Peter Pan syndrome: They refuse to commit, refuse to settle down, and refuse to "grow up."

However, given the family court policies and divorce trends of today, Peter Pan is no naive boy, but instead a wise man.

"Why should I get married and have kids when I could lose those kids and most of what I've worked for at a moment's notice?" asks Dan, a 31-year-old power plant technician who says he will never marry.

"I've seen it happen to many of my friends. I know guys who came home one day to an empty house or apartment - wife gone, kids gone. They never saw it coming. Some of them were never able to see their kids regularly again."

Census figures suggest that the marriage rate in the United States has dipped 40 percent during the last four decades to its lowest point since the rate was measured. There are many plausible explanations for this trend, but one of the least mentioned is that American men, in the face of a family court system hopelessly stacked against them, have subconsciously launched a "marriage strike."

It is not difficult to see why. Let's say that Dan defies Peter Pan, marries Katherine, and has two children. There is a 50 percent likelihood that this marriage will end in divorce within eight years, and if it does, the odds are 2-1 it will be Katherine, not Dan, who initiates the divorce. It may not matter that Dan was a decent husband. Studies show that few divorces are initiated over abuse or because the man has already abandoned the family. Nor is adultery cited as a factor by divorcing women appreciably more than by divorcing men.

While the courts may grant Dan and Katherine joint legal custody, the odds are overwhelming that it is Katherine, not Dan, who will win physical custody. Overnight, Dan, accustomed to seeing his kids every day and being an integral part of their lives, will become a "14 percent dad" - a father who is allowed to spend only one out of every seven days with his own children.

Once Katherine and Dan are divorced, odds are at least even that Katherine will interfere with Dan's visitation rights.

Three-quarters of divorced men surveyed say their ex-wives have interfered with their visitation, and 40 percent of mothers studied admitted that they had done so, and that they had generally acted out of spite or in order to punish their exes.

Katherine will keep the house and most of the couple's assets. Dan will need to set up a new residence and pay at least a third of his take-home pay to Katherine in child support.

As bad as all of this is, it would still make Dan one of the lucky ones. After all, he could be one of those fathers who cannot see his children at all because his ex has made a false accusation of domestic violence, child abuse, or child molestation. Or a father who can only see his own children under supervised visitation or in nightmarish visitation centers where dads are treated like criminals.

He could be one of those fathers whose ex has moved their children hundreds or thousands of miles away, in violation of court orders, which courts often do not enforce. He could be one of those fathers who tears up his life and career again and again in order to follow his children, only to have his ex-wife continually move them.

He could be one of the fathers who has lost his job, seen his income drop, or suffered a disabling injury, only to have child support arrearages and interest pile up to create a mountain of debt which he could never hope to pay off. Or a father who is forced to pay 70 percent or 80 percent of his income in child support because the court has imputed an unrealistic income to him. Or a dad who suffers from one of the child support enforcement system's endless and difficult to correct errors, or who is jailed because he cannot keep up with his payments. Or a dad who reaches old age impoverished because he lost everything he had in a divorce when he was middle-aged and did not have the time and the opportunity to earn it back.

"It's a shame," Dan says. "I always wanted to be a father and have a family. But unless the laws change and give fathers the same right to be a part of their children's lives as mothers have, it just isn't worth the risk."

Dianna Thompson is the founder and executive director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. She can be contacted by e-mail at DThompson2232@aol.com. Glenn Sacks writes about gender issues from the male perspective. He invites readers' comments at Glenn@GlennSacks.com.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: donutwatch
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760 ... 781-798 next last
To: Yeti
Has anyone else noticed how, in the bigger piture of the last 150-ish years of social and political evolution, white men constitute the only social group that consistently votes egalitarian?

What if we stopped? Perhaps it has come to the point where it's now an essential defensive measure... unfortunately.

721 posted on 07/08/2002 1:01:26 PM PDT by Rytwyng
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Dark Mirage
No, I haven't been online long, just since 1990.

And you would have us believe that you don't know what a "troll" is? That doesn't add up. I could understand if you were a late adopter, but old-timers would be hard-pressed to not have come across that term over the years. I've been online since 1991, and "troll" has been basic vocabulary for a long time.

722 posted on 07/08/2002 1:01:37 PM PDT by tortoise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies]

To: Rytwyng
That's 24 years of searching.

And 24 years of amazing self control.

723 posted on 07/08/2002 1:14:29 PM PDT by buccaneer81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 720 | View Replies]

Comment #724 Removed by Moderator

To: buccaneer81
That's 24 years of searching.

And 24 years of amazing self control.

Self-control... not quite. Solitary release was the alternative to insanity or dangerous heavy petting. I made a perilously close approach a few times (feel free to quote Monty Python & the Holy Grail here!), especially when I was younger... but by some miracle I never went all the way til the wedding night.

I really recommend marrying young. So help me, I tried to do it myself, but it just wasn't to be.

725 posted on 07/08/2002 2:02:04 PM PDT by Rytwyng
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 723 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties
I think Balto Boy is conflating the men and and families hurt by unjust divorces with men who are only interested in casual relationships with women.

Not really. I got into this thread by responding to claims of how the courts are taking fathers out of the family by pointing out that male behavior has a lot to do with it. That's all.

726 posted on 07/08/2002 2:08:47 PM PDT by Balto_Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 661 | View Replies]

To: Dark Mirage
I've never heard the term before, but perhaps you know less than you think. The system I'm using at present is my third custom-built computer by the way; I don't like off the shelf units. It's my fifth computer, if you count the TRS-80 purchased in 1979.

That's okay, because there is scads of documentation on the origination and popular usage of the term "troll". It came into popular use circa 1993 on Usenet (due in no small part to a famous flamewar on alt.folklore.urban IIRC). The term has been part of the Jargon File for the better part of a decade. It would be really difficult to be involved in the computer industry and not be familiar with that term, as it was a well-known term in UNIX and Internet culture before either became really popular with the masses.

I used to build my own computers, but it isn't worth my time or money these days. A lot of the stuff I buy isn't buildable anyway (huge systems with somewhat esoteric hardware), and my desktop (which I usually carefully specify but have someone else build) is mostly just a terminal for the back-ends.

I've been using PCs since 1974 to operate scientific instrumentation like FTIRs, GC, and HPLCs...I have been at this awhile, so stop stamping your feed and crowing how knowledgable you are because of your kiddie geek slang.

I'd be impressed with your acronyms if it wasn't for the fact that my degrees are actually in chemistry and chemical engineering and I've used all the equipment in question many times (I even own a nice GC); using it amounts to tedious technician work. Definitely not the most memorable work I've had to do. Fortunately I actually found an interesting use for those skills many years later pursuing personal interests. I made my fame and fortune in the field of mathematics and computer science; I was good at the chemistry but it was a real snooze-fest most of the time.

"Troll" is not "kiddie geek slang", as it essentially pre-dates the Internet boom and the web, so the only people using it in the early years were people at big tech companies (usually ones with DARPA contracts) and universities. But since the mid-90s, most people that have used the Internet are at least familiar with the term. Hell, my parents know what it means and they aren't exactly savvy computer users (though they use the Internet a lot).

727 posted on 07/08/2002 3:43:44 PM PDT by tortoise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies]

Comment #728 Removed by Moderator

To: tortoise
And you would have us believe that you don't know what a "troll" is? That doesn't add up. I could understand if you were a late adopter, but old-timers would be hard-pressed to not have come across that term over the years. I've been online since 1991, and "troll" has been basic vocabulary for a long time.

A lot of things aren't adding up. I suspect that someone is making it up as she goes along. Gets caught and quickly changes the subject.

729 posted on 07/08/2002 5:48:52 PM PDT by meyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies]

To: Dark Mirage
I feed my ego writing fantasy fiction

Its all starting to come together now...

730 posted on 07/08/2002 6:08:01 PM PDT by meyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 728 | View Replies]

Comment #731 Removed by Moderator

To: Dark Mirage
That I can put both sides of my brain to constructive, positive use?

the evidence thereof is lacking...

732 posted on 07/08/2002 6:30:16 PM PDT by meyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 731 | View Replies]

To: Nick Danger
I have often wondered where the seemingly oppressive customs regarding women that we see in Muslim countries, India, and most of Asia come from. Things like that don't just happen, they arise in response to circumstance. It may be that we are witnessing a bout of The Circumstance. Perhaps this is just what happens when women get close to political power, and why so many human societies have evolved mechanisms to prevent it from happening.
_________________________

YUP! A thousand times yup!


733 posted on 07/08/2002 7:23:28 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Wave of husband killings in Iran Clymer News Network | July 8, 2002 ........after 30 years of marriage, she had had enough. She arranged to have her husband, Hedayat, killed

...is one of at least 20 Tehran women accused of murdering their husbands since February.

"Husband killing is a new phenomenon in Iran's male-dominated society.

Now, things have changed. They are more outspoken and courageous. Women have become aware of their rights and are fighting for equality," he said.

Sorry guys, the times they are a changin.LOL

734 posted on 07/08/2002 8:38:20 PM PDT by SouthernFreebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 733 | View Replies]

To: Balto_Boy
Let me restate. By grouping the very different actions of two groups of men together, you are doing less than nothing to clarify or resolve any problem here.

In effect, by obdurately failing to acknowledge this distinction, you are implicitly promoting the unsupported assumption that men who are being divorced by their wives are really no different or at least no less blameworthy in their actions than those who consort with unwed mothers and casually victimize women.

This blaming of all men for the actions of some is patently ridiculous, partly because it is really nothing but obfuscation in the final analysis, and assuming such absurdities can do nothing to help the situation.

Clearer now?

735 posted on 07/08/2002 11:07:44 PM PDT by Post Toasties
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 726 | View Replies]

To: SouthernFreebird
What I find ironic is that all these fashionable 'blame others' identity politics ultimately tend toward social despostisms and impoverishments which severely infringe on the 'freedoms' ostensibly being sought for (which equals great stupidity, to my way of thinking). Who on this board isn't aware of how more Muslis than people in the West care to think about are are manipulating Lefty nihilists and greedheads to tear down Western egalitariansim with the ultimate (Islamic) goal of subjugating women?
736 posted on 07/08/2002 11:16:32 PM PDT by Post Toasties
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties
despotisms...egalitarianism ---time to call it a day if I'm making typos like that:)
737 posted on 07/08/2002 11:51:43 PM PDT by Post Toasties
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 736 | View Replies]

To: SouthernFreebird
Sorry guys, the times they are a changin.LOL

Heh. Kill men, kill babies; take men's children away from them; take children's fathers away from them. Nothing wrong with any of that. The only thing that matters is yourselves. LOL.

738 posted on 07/09/2002 3:15:12 AM PDT by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

Comment #739 Removed by Moderator

To: Motherbear
Bless your heart! Thank you for your concern. Most of the work is non-paying and dedicated to our yearly convention and home schooling in general. I do work a mere three days outside the home at a 'real' job but only part time. Our split of the housework seems to be perfect. I have yet to take out the garbage and make the beds and he has yet to do laundry. He does do the ironing though.
It really helps to have older children who pitch in and love to do so!

I can see where this would be a problem with expecting a partner to work full time and do all the housework too. What worked for us early in our home schooling adventures was to write up a task chart for the month. (believe or not it was great for the kids to learn the calendar too!)

I broke down the month and days of the week and assigned duties for everyone to check off as they did them. The everyday items were rotated and two nights a week he cooks dinner. This works wonders for us. I still handle the lions share, but he works full time while I do not.
In the end, most problems can probably be avoided by good communication. I have learned this the hard way. Once I stopped expecting him to read my mind it stopped being a problem. Of course....I have the greatest husband on the face of the earth, not that I am biased or anything...(grin)

740 posted on 07/09/2002 5:11:32 AM PDT by Taxula
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760 ... 781-798 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson